As shocking as it may seem, the real Paul McCartney is dead. He was imposter-replaced in 1966 by a double. This "conspiracy theory," called PID (Paul is Dead) for short, involves some of the following tangential issues:

public figures (including doubles) used as puppets to manipulate the masses;

elimination of opposition to this elite by horizontalization (th e likely assassination of James Paul McCartney with impunity);

deception of the public by a cartel of media groups controlled by a governing Luciferian elite (Illuminati);

social control through Psychological Operations (PsyOps); and

Info War in cyberspace using disinformation, debunking and counter Intelligence techniques to discredit ideas and individuals who oppose their plans.

The "official" PID story has it that Paul was killed in a car crash on or about November 9, 1966 and was replaced by look-alike William Campbell. This rumor first began in England in 1967. However, it picked up steam in the Fall of 1969 when clues allegedly planted by the Beatles themselves began to be uncovered.

On September 17th, 1969 The Drake Times-Delphic published what is widely considered the first printed account of Beatle Paul McCartney’s supposed death. Days after Drake undergrad Tim Harper asked the question “Is Paul Dead?” on the TD’s front page, college papers across the country ran with the story and the theory of “Paul is Dead!” raced across America.

On October 12, 1969, a Detroit disc jockey, Russ Gibb, received a call from a listener (“Tom”) insisting McCartney was dead and suggesting he play the Beatles' song ''Revolution Nine'' backwards. Gibb did, and heard “turn me on dead man, turn me on dead man.''

In an article in the August 2009 Italian issue of WIRED magazine, two forensic scientists conducted a biometrical analysis of Paul pre and post 1966. They set out to prove PID was a hoax, but they actually ended up proving Paul was replaced.

In 2009, two Italians, Francesco Gavazzeni (IT analyst) and Carlesi Gabriella (medico-legal), studied images of Paul McCartney taken before and after the alleged death, and claimed there is high probability that it is not the same person, based on analysis of the shape of the skull and jaw, the curve of the jaw, the ear, palate and teeth.[17].

The following are excerpts from the article. Please note that this is a machine translation of the original Italian.

Jaw line: “The mandibular curve between the two sets of photos showed a discrepancy of over 6 percent, well beyond the threshold of error. But there was more. Changed the development of the mandibular profile: before 1966 each side of the jaw is composed of two curves, since 1967 appears to be a single curve. There is therefore a curve morphological different.” [Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” WIRED Magazine, July 15, 2009,http://tinyurl.com/mw83db]

Nose: “[A]lways under the mustache of the McCartney Sgt Pepper's, maybe it was trying to hide something else: what the experts call it the nose-spinal or sottonasale [nasal spine: http://www.revisionrhinoplasty.com/anatomy.html]. This is the point between the two nostrils where the nose begins to fall off the face: ‘This is also in this case a distinctive feature that medicine cannot alter surgery. It can change the shape of the nose but not the nose-cord,’ says Gabriella Carlesi. ‘And McCartney from the first group of photos and the second point that clearly varies’” [Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” WIRED Magazine, July 15, 2009, http://tinyurl.com/mw83db]

Ears: “Technically called trago [tragus: http://www.westone.com/content/234.html]. All we have two, one by ear, but the characteristics are different for every human being. ‘In Germany, a recognition procedure craniometric, identification of the right ear is even tantamount to fingerprint, ie the collection of fingerprints,’ recalls Carlesi. But what is trago? It is the small cartilage covered with skin that overhangs the entrance to the ear and ear canal, like the whole ear, cannot be changed surgically. How then to explain the differences between the right ear of Paul McCartney in a previous snapshot to 1966 and probably a built in the late nineties? It is not only to betray trago a different conformation as well as other parts, just above the ear canal entrance, measurements and dell'antelice propeller. Things that ordinary mortals might seem irrelevant or unclear, but instead, every day, allowing the experts to locate and identify persons, bodies, photographs.” [Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” WIRED Magazine, July 15, 2009,http://tinyurl.com/mw83db]

[Please support this blog by clicking on the sponsors' ads - Thanks!]

Lips: "Compared to the previous picture, that of Sgt Pepper's show clearly that the commessura lip, that is the line formed by the lips of the two, it was suddenly stretched. Which obviously is not possible and that the whiskers cannot camouflage. In other words, the phenomenon is all too frequent these days, the lips can be inflated and increased in volume, but the width of the lip commessura cannot vary that much. Maybe slight, but this is not the case for the photos examined: here the difference between the before and after is too strong to have been caused by any surgery.” [Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” WIRED Magazine, July 15, 2009,http://tinyurl.com/mw83db]

Teeth & Palate: “There are impossible things and things that are possible but at the cost of operations long, painful and never perfect. Especially if done in the sixties. Now, careful examination of some pictures of McCartney before and after the 1966 autumn leaves, it must be said, in amazement: ‘First of all there is right upper canine,’ observes Carlesi Gabriella. ‘In the photos prior to 1966 is known as protruding relative to the line of teeth. It's the classic case of a tooth that lack of space it ends up misaligned, pushed out by the pressure of other teeth. It is curious that the same canines in the photos from 1967 forward, but without ever protruding apparent reason: the images show that the space would have to be aligned with the neighboring teeth. It's like if you wanted to recreate is a detail in a mouth where such an anomaly would have never been able to express.’ The real crux of the reasoning of dental identification suggested by Gabriella Carlesi covers the whole palate of McCartney that before 1966, appears close to the point of justifying various misalignments of the teeth, although in less obvious forms of upper right canine. After the publication of Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, however, the palate of McCartney widens considerably, to the point that the front teeth do not rotate on the axis more as before. With the only on, than the usual canine. ‘A change of the shape of the palate, Carlesi concludes, 'in the Sixties was not impossible but would be very traumatic, the result of an actual intervention maxillo-facial. In practice McCartney should have been subjected to an operation that would involve the opening of the suture palate, broken bone and then a long prosthetic and orthodontic treatment. In other words, for a change so sensitive in the sixties to McCartney would be required not only a particularly painful and bloody, but also the use of a fixed orthodontic multiband then, for over a year. Which would not have been possible to hide and would be obvious repercussions on the performance of a vocal professional singer.’” [Andriola and Alessandra Di Fabio Gigante, “Ask Who Was the ‘Beatle,’” WIRED Magazine, July 15, 2009, http://tinyurl.com/mw83db]

The following comp is upside down to break the viewer's normal conditioning. The nose on the right is markedly longer than Paul's nose on the left. The images are screen captures from the Aug 19, 1966 Memphis interview (left) and an interview in Dec. 1966 in front of EMI studios. Both are supposedly Paul.

For more background information, please check out these radio interviews

This is confirmed by an investigation of "Wired"It 'one of the best known legends of rock: Paul McCartney died in 1966 and what we know today is merely a double that has changed. A legend who just now seemed to have been dismantled and forgotten. But now two scientists have conducted an investigation for "Wired": The objective was to demonstrate that everything was false but the results were rather surprising ...

The object of the dispute is the "PID", or the legend "Paul Is Dead". Dedicarcisi A were two experts, the computer Francesco Gavazzeni legal and medical Carlesi Gabriella. The objective was to demonstrate that all these entries were false and unfounded, urban legends, in fact, throw a meal in the media and fans. The studies conducted by two experts however have led to quite unexpected results.

The story in brief: Paul McCartney, the original is in fact died in a car accident in 1966, a crash occurred on board of his Austin Martin after a quarrel with other members of the band. From that time to replace him there would be a double. Would have been the Beatles themselves to disseminate texts confirm this in the coming years more or less messages subliminal by allusive covers such as "Abbey Road", a message engraved on a disk on the contrary.

Gavazzeni Carlesi and were based on anthropometric and craniometrica, comparing, through images of repertoire, shape of the skull, teeth, etc.. in the before and after 1966. And, since these tests, however, we can express only in terms of compatibility and non-certainty, the results still give a negative result: that is, the person known as Paul McCartney before 1966 would not be the same that we see in the photos taken after that date. Case reopened?

feed://www.howstuffworks.com/podcasts/stuff-they-dont-want-you-to-know.rss Does the CIA use body doubles?ConspiracyJan 1, 4:07 PMOver the past decades, the CIA has been accused of everything from selling guns to assassinating people. Yet that's not the craziest part: Some people believe the CIA is actually replacing its enemies. Tune in and learn more in this episode.

I swear the original Paul McCartney had very thick hair washed to the right. The second Paul seems to have a Cow's Lick right there on the righthand side. That hair would never have been able to be combed so thickly over to the right????

I swear the original Paul McCartney had very thick hair washed to the right. The second Paul seems to have a Cow's Lick right there on the righthand side. That hair would never have been able to be combed so thickly over to the right????

After lots of research on this I do not believe Paul McCartney died in 1966.

I do believe there were more than one person being presented as Paul.

One theory I find strong evidence for is there were 3 people who played Paul at one point or another. The original Paul, the most well known Faul Billy Shears (who spent the least amount of time playing Paul), and the very rarely mentioned Phil Akrill who I believe is the current Paul McCartney we know today.

Phil Akrill had extensive surgery to appear more like Paul, especially in the chin. But the eyes and ears don't lie. Its also odd that Paul McCartneys son has facial features that look a lot like Phil Akrill. Another thing to note is Phil Akrill was also a known musician in a couple bands back in the 60s. He knew John Lennon. Yet he pretty much disappeared after 1966. Wonder why?

I do believe however that the original MacCartney did rotate in the mix. For example, Hey Jude is clearly a Faul with his light eyes. Yet go to Let It Be or the Don't Let Me Down rooftop performance and there is the original brown eyed Paul. I think the multiple Pauls explains a lot.

One other possible strong theory I have heard that may be plausible is that orginally there were two Pauls played by the McCartney brothers. The man we know as is brother is an actor. If you look at childhood photos of the two they appear closer in age than the admit. Also you can see that one looks like Paul and the other looks a lot like Faul. It would make sense if they were brothers, twins possibly why they have some features that match exactly while others dont (the teeth for example)

I believe the theory of chaos magic. That all these switches were to cause choas so that we wouldn't catch on.

I don't believe this illusion was only used on Paul. I believe there is strong evidence John was also switched at some point. How is it not obvious to the world there was a huge change in Johns profile after a certain point? Early photos show a shorter rounded nose yet later (after Sgt Peppers) his nose is now pointed in profile? Doesn't look like the same nose from that view. John was obviously played by at least 2 men as well.

I wouldn't be surprised if George and Ringo had doubles as well. Im not sure of why they had doubles but I think they did from the start.

Oh and when looking up childhood photos of Paul and his brother look at the hair. Notice anything? Pauls sits flat while is brother has the split or cowlick. The Paul McCartney presented to us has had both features at times. Maybe more proof for the brother theory

The photo above, captioned "from the interview Paul did when John Lennon was killed in Dec. 1980", is incorrect. The photo is circa 1976, during the time of the Wings world tour. By 1980, the Macca mullet was shorn and Linda was not present when Paul was interviewed, following John's death. While photo documentation exists of that occasion, this is not it. Thanks.

Thank you for that correction, Kary.Xnihilator, Faul was the name that Johnny gave to the replacement. That name is used by many in the PID circle, because we are not sure if William Campbell was just a pseudonym.

i believe the comparisons of mccartneys muscial skills are more telling.

listen to the album revolver and then listen to the later albums,

or more easily listen to the song here, there and everywhere off the album and then listen to it being played by faul on you tube, its horrible.

ive also seen analysis of his bass play, faul apparently was a better bass player, but also they had to record it on a separate track as he was a little slow and couldnt just play it live with the others.

yeah it is hard to beleive faul is paul, what happened to the good music?daytripper is immense. all the pre 67 music is.when i was a kid my babysuitter would play the red album with all the older stuff never the faul stuff.

I love your blog Tina. it's tip top, great research. Now, I remember seeing this video with Heather Mills, now Faul's ex wife and in this one clip she talks about the "great conspiracy." Do you think she found out?

Also Faul's post Beatles stuff sucked, however, Bank on the Run was a great fake....although the one album that makes you think it's Paul is Chaos and Creation in the back yard.....is another one....the rest? Well, I can't say.

I grew up with the music of the Beatles, it gave me joy in times of sorrow. I've always had this doubt in my mind, IF the present Paul McCartney was indeed, the real, original Paul McCartney, because of the clues given on records and lyrics. I came across this video in YOU Tube , everything fits like a glove, George even mentions over 100 new clues . I can't insert the link, but is under the title of " George Harrison's last testament "One big doubt about this video, is that I tried contacting the producers of it thru the e-mail addresses given, they simply don't exist. But I do have the following questions to the makers of this video

Did the wives of The Beatles knew of this ? Did brian Epstein knew of this? Was that the reason he commited suicide? Did Mal Evans and Derek taylor knew of this? Then Paul didn't dreamed " Yesterday" as the present Paul has stated so many times? How can Mark Chapman be linked to MI5? Was that the reason he was able to get his gun thru 3 airports? Hawaii, Califoria and New york ? Is Ringo's life in danger? "Abbey road" was the last record they recorded, not "Let It Be". You be the judge. Thanks.

There's a woman in Germany who was Paul's girlfriend before 1966 who has always claimed she had become pregnant with Paul's child & he knew about it. Paul was worried about his reputation and asked her to have an abortion because he knew the child was his. This woman had contact with Paul, but all of a sudden he cut it off post November 1966. Recently, she obtained a court order for a DNA test to prove once and for all her daughter is Paul's biological child, and this woman knows she didn't sleep with other men, only Paul McCartney. Faul agreed immediately to the test, he didn't hesitate for one second. The DNA test was done, and to this woman's horror it said "no DNA match". As a result, she is on a crusade to prove that this Paul is Faul. One must remember that in those days things were different woman didn't sleep around, it was considered bad enough if you slept with one person. Apparently, this woman has a lock of hair Paul gave her before 1966, she wants to have it DNA tested and compared to Faul's DNA but guess what; she's having a hard time finding someone to do it. They have Faul's DNA profile but asked him to provide a hair sample just to see his reaction. Faul had a fit and won't do it.

I have met a woman who has for decades been claiming that she had a child to Paul in 1968. She won a call-in radio competition on the topic of Paul. She announced this over the radio show to all listeners in the South Coast of NSW in Australia. The child was a boy and was placed to live in Denmark. The woman had been in Germany. She was also married. The man who was her husband at the time had family connected in business to Sandringham. The woman already had a daughter with her husband and seemed to want to link her first child to Paul. The woman who had her fling with Paul was English. Her mother was German and lived in Beccles. In the 1970s the women went to live in Australia. Ten years later she was divorced and still pining about losing Paul AND her baby son. She looks remarkably like Fred from Denmark. She was into collecting locks of hair. If this is the same woman she may have changed her story due to her age. She (the mother) was born in 1936. She said a lot of times that she missed her son who was being raised by a notable family and as a soldier. That is the male that needs to be tested with Paul. Fred actually has a lot of connections socially with Paul. YES there must be DNA tests done. If he is in the wrong family this information must be corrected as soon as possible as there are big business opening ti him due to his likely bogus but currently accepted lineage. This son is very easy to find as he became a public figure. The question now is, where did the child go that he replaced? Then, who did that and why? Did they parents need to replace a girl child? The family of the alleged boy is in strategic political life. Does the woman leading his new family know he is not her natural child?

I don't understand it. This should have been ALL over the news and entertainment news like TMZ etc. How did anyone miss this? Unless our favorite imposter purposefully took control and shut down any debate.

PID was all over the news in the Fall of 1969 in Europe & USA. The Controllers managed to suppress people's waking up to JPM's replacement through their control of the media. When our favorite impostor told LIFE magazine that he was still alive (not that he was JPM), then most people were satisfied. It seems people had more blind faith in the media back then.

I recently watched a documentry about "George Harrison's Last Testement" which provided information about the clues the Beatles left behind in their music as well as record covers post Nov.1966 ... I find it interesting that Paul was left handed and today's "FAUL" is right handed. I think the picture comparisons are great and something that was not mentioned in the documentary.

Politics. International politics. Business deals and eradication of bloodlines. We must remember how soon this was after WWII. Just look at all the people that migrated to Australian to get away from death threats. Perhaps that is where Paul headed? Perhaps every person should get DNA tested whenever there is a query. Add that to compulsory forensic rape allegation testing and there would be greater honest in society. It was well known that many women craved after musicians. There is perhaps many children floating about who are all related. It would be financially detrimental if all these cam forward asking for money, so it would not take much shifty business for a lab to give a false-negative test report. All politics and MONEY. Fame and shame rhyme. Dame and maim rhyme too. A girl child is still discarded by many. A boy child is the heir. Any authority that switched a child would also have influence to silence their work.

in reply to anonymous 2/3/11 6:26am - wait just a second... as a life long Beatles fan and quazi-believer in the PID theory... the "Last Testament of George Harrison" movie is complete BS, especially the pictures. Look at the movie at 55 min: 50-55ish seconds and see the picture they show from 'MMT'... now do ANY search for that same pic from a different source and compare...

BS.

There are other "mistakes" in the movie, like the order of recordings - 'Let It Be' was not last. This recording was sent to that "unknown" studio vs. BBC or CNN?

I still believe there is much more to this than The Beatles trying to play a joke on the world, but to use that "film" as evidence is disproving your point.

^ Many PID Truthers think "Last Testament of George Harrison" is just disinfo to discredit PID. It makes outrageous claims & focuses on goofy theories rather than sound forensic evidence that proves Paul was replaced.

I was reading about the Illuminati and came to this article. I always wondered if it were true about Paul and now I know. There was something about that 'Faul' that never rang true. Now I know the truth. Thanks for posting! Great work.

I also watched "Last Testament of George Harrison" last night, and I have to say, it didn't convince me very much. The photo's maybe and the album covers yes, but some of it had misinformation, such as Let It Be being the last song. I admit I'm not a huge Beatles fan, I'm just beginning to listen to them and I don't know much information about them, but this article did it! I studied Biology and I now have a B.S. in Biology and all these examinations of photographs makes complete sense. Especially the photo of Fauls ear and Pauls ear, the bottom of the ear is completely different, and Fauls nose is not Pauls nose. I also remember watching an interview of Faul last year on a morning news channel where he was asked if he would sing old Beatles' hits and he said no he didn't want to ruin the songs themselves. BS! I now believe that he doesn't want to sing them, because it would show everyone that his voice is not Paul! Thank you for this article, well done!

Paul/Faul has sung Beatles songs in live concerts many, many times. I don't doubt his talent, even if he's not the real Paul.

I just watched George Harrison's last testament last night. I thought it was pretty ridiculous. If Paul were lying dead on the ground mangled and decapitated, do you really think an MI-5 agent named Maxwell would say that he looks like a walrus? After watching that, I was convinced that PID is a hoax. After seeing this site, I'm starting to think otherwise.

^ The "Last Testament" is based on the 60IF PID document, which has many problems with it. The "Last Testament" was identified early on as a disinfo hit-piece put out there to 1) cash in on the renewed interest in PID & 2) discredit PID w/ ridiculous claims. It is obviously not George's voice & does not concentrate on the documented physical differences between Paul & Faul. It just makes asinine assertions not based in any fact, which of course, turns people off of PID. Unfortunately, it is not an ineffective tactic.

Thanks for reminding me that I need to make a post dedicated to The "Last Testament of George Harrison."

I saw "The Last Testament of Geroge Harrison". At first I thought it was a real attempt at a documentary as Harrison's bad Liverpudlian accent and American pronunciation of English words. When it was pointed out at the end that Rita and Heather Mills were the same person (despite the fact that Heather had yet to be born) I realised that the whole film was a spoof. Sucker bait. It was an entirely fake effort otherwise why leave in glaring errors and close with a real peach or a mistake? Quoting this film will only hurt your cause - it's on the side of non PIDS!

There seems to be some interesting bits of information in one of the tapes of George Harrisons testament. the fact that the beatles were constantly monitored & harrassed if they got out of line explains why they remained silent for so long--FEAR. you have to put the jig saw puzzle together using the fragments of information to arrive at the truth. Do not discard the fragments until you can complete the puzzle in your search for the truth.What really happened??

Thanks for your due diligence in this matter. As citizens of a government we may not want to know the truth about certain events or things for knowledge of the truth and actuality may be more disturbing than we can rationally deal with. Of course there is official decisions and actions taken that are declared secret, with fear of be taken out and other wise classified under "Need to know." Then there is the spin, the disinformation, the so called unbiased reviews of evidence - an agency and internet trolls and co-conspirators descrediting any evidence in the public domain. The very phrases "Conspiracy Theory" and "Urban Legend" or "Urban Myth" to you and I may simply mean as of yet unproven, while to others it is assumed to be a fable, a hoax, a wild imagination, a sensational story, entertaining , yet not true. Assasinations and cover-ups have been etched into our collective conscious, and others want to live blissfully spouting "nothing awry." So if nothing is awry, get out of us truth hunters way. That's what I say... Q: Is it possible to view a copy of G.H.'s Last Will and Testament. I suspect if those audio tapes have any authenticity to them and they were mailed from London, that they were mailed from George's Barrister / Executor of his estate. If the joke is on me and Sir Paul is the real deal, than so be it, and peace out. Faul would never go public if there was a pact made under severe penalty, and also there would likely be many multimillion dollar lawsuits filed against him.

^ Thanks for posting that. In my opinion, the movie is going to perpetrate the disinformation that Paul died in an accident. I find the accident scenario highly unlikely. However, it will, at least, gain attention for PID.

Performers can learn anything. There is a massive industry with chapters all over the world carrying off performances in the name of Elvis Presley. Some even get plastic surgery done to alter themselves. Just madness ! All these performers learn ever mannerism and breath from old footage. The question is Who can the current Paul now be match with for DNA testing? Then we must ask where he came from and where the real Paul went to live? Is he really dead or just taking space from the industry? Maybe the substitute want to be rich? Maybe it really is the real Paul.

I never saw anyone propose this, but I've followed this and other forums now and then including one on dopplegangers, and some of it seems so bizarre, but did anyone ever think about why many celebrities have fake names? The fake name isn't really them, but sort of a brand or persona, which I would imagine could be bought or sold. Perhaps celebrities get famous, maybe they don't want to work or get sick or injured, and can sell their brand to someone who wants to be them, for a hefty price tag and maybe royalties, who knows?

The teeth? He chipped his tooth in an accident. you can see the damage in The Beatles' Rain music video. Since then he got it fixed. The other stuff.. I dunno. But this all seemed ridiculous at first, but now I have my doubts

Yes, we know Paul chipped his tooth in a moped accident in Dec. 1965. That is not what the forensic scientists are talking about, though. They are saying the tooth was twisted, then it wasn't later. Paul would have had to have had major reconstruction on his teeth & mouth to account for the changes the forensic scientists noticed. That didn't happen, obviously, so it's proof Paul was replaced by a lame impostor. (Sorry, hope you're not a Faul fan - lol)

Music in the 1960s was a massive industry and there were an extreme number of people learning his style. The potential for someone to learn the music an slip in under the shadow of other events of the time is possible. Have you ever considered that perhaps Paul McCartney may have had a twin. In some cultures a twin was considered bad luck and brought shame upon the family. Until recently that was the way with the Australian Aboriginal people.

I've recently heard about a phenomenon called "change blindness" which might explain others inability to see the switch right away, besides media manipulation.

In visual perception, change blindness is a normal phenomenon of the brain which show in light that the brain does not have a precise representation of the world but a lacunar one, made of partial details. Despite the name, this phenomenon does not affect the eyes but the brain, and as such is bound to happen to all the human senses...Another issue is that the brain cannot see a change happening to an element that it has not yet stored.

A spectacular showcase can be seen in Derren Brown's "Person Swap" sketch, which can be found on youtube.

^ There is a famous quote by Henry L. Bergson that goes something like the eye can only see what the mind is prepared to comprehend. Plus, people have been trained to see Faul as Paul. There is a lot of Pavlovian conditioning to over-come to get people to see what is *really* there, namely a very poor double.

I'm familiar w/ that Derren Brown episode. He even mentions a "famous pop-star." Wonder who he was thinking of. LOL Yeah, I'm pretty sure he isn't fooled by Faul...

I was watching an interview of Faul on the David Letterman show . Has this interview ever been looked at by a body language expert ? I'm retired in Law Enforcement , and I learned that excessive blinking is a sign of extreme stress , which may indicate lying.

It is so true, Anonymous. I just wrote that on a comment a few minutes ago. Blinking and putting the hand to the face. People in law enforcement, FBI, psychologists are all trained to look for this in people being deceitful. You notice when he says that it was hot on the day of the Abby Road shoot, he was telling the truth. Faul is a cautious man. BUt he does slip up from time to time, and Faul does touch his face when talking of the old Beatles.

^ My research is that Faul stepped in on Aug. 28, 1966 (LA), so it was Faul playing at Candlestick. Probably why the concert - the last Beatles concert ever - has not been hyped. By most accounts, it was a catastrophe. At the LA press conference, well-known Illuminati-musiCIAn, David Crosby, was hovering around in the background. Also, the Beatles took a couple of days off in Hollywood Aug. 26-27 where no one saw neither hide nor hair of them. If you are familiar w/ Dave McGowan's work, you will know that being a celebrity is more dangerous than being a cop or firefighter - especially in Hollywood. All the pieces fit for an Aug. 26-27, 1966 Paul replacement... oh, one other thing. Pics from the Aug. 25 Seattle concert were recycled & pawned off as being from Candlestick.

He looks loads like those siblings Verna, Brenda and Neville Shiplee from Suffolk. They must all now be nearly eighty. But we must admit that there are some many look-a-likes for so many other people all over this planet.

I did a lot search but can't find the name of Faul?if it was Bill Campbell from Ontario, even if he looks a like,he must be good musician?how about Phil Ackrill ? he's a musician from the diplomats band and his friend was Denny Lane amazingly he later teamed up with him to play with Wings!

No one really knows what Faul's real name is. He has been called Billy Shears, which some of us think is an allusion to William Shakespeare, which was the alias of Sir Francis Bacon.

I don't really buy the Phil Akrill story. I doubt anyone famous became Faul. I suspect he was recruited by some intell agency to become Paul. Actually, I think he might have been discovered via the 1965 Paul McCartney look-alike contest. Here is something about the Faul guy:

Hi PM, Shakespeare's plays were very likely to have been written by Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford (see for example http://www.deveresociety.co.uk/index.php?page=home or http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/oxford/hi/people_and_places/history/newsid_8380000/8380564.stm - yes, BBC, but interesting nevertheless - or the 2011 film "Anonymous" (!) starring Rhys Ifans), but it comes to the same thing - Billy Shakespeare could not have written those plays.Many thanks for this blog, BTW, and for helping to enlighten people about the way they are being duped.

With the social behaviour of finding a visual match to Paul we must ask why? Perhaps one of the contestants or some investor types got an idea to make themselves rich. But then maybe he had the funds and desire to try some early plastic surgery?

Keith Allison, born 8-26-42 in Coleman Texas. I think he was a member of Paul Revere and the Raiders from 68-75. He also toured as a lead guitarist with Tommy Boyce and Bobby Hart, and Mickey Dolenz and Davy Jones in 1976. He was surely a musician, but what is his part in this?

^ I don't think Keith Allison had any part in it. I think the Paul McCartney lookalike contest might have been a ruse to find a double for Paul. If Faul had been recruited this way, then I bet he never even was entered as a contestant, but quickly whisked off to begin his training, having never appeared on the radar. Then the "contest" is carried out as a legit endeavor w/ a real winner, etc.

Who ever it was who replaced him well financed , and organized, which might explain why he is still pretending to be Paul even today. Sooner or later somebody is going to ..."slip up" and that will open a can of worms , if you know what I mean. I wouldn't be surprised if individuals, and or family's have been threatened with death.

If you look at footage of that time, young girls fainted at the sight of them. I can totally believe that if those women today heard this for first time they would be extremely disturbed. OMG How much else have we been lied to.Sorry I didn't mean you were one of this girls, since you asked so fervently it made me think of those. Imagine what it would mean. All they had were a few bands and dancing etc. But I would like to know why are being lied at so much.

Ohhh....Now i feel like i dont want listen this music..oh my god...this is crazy... the most crazy thing i ever heard...i love Paul McCartney...real Paul i had some feelings that he changed..that he is strange...but...THIS??!!

I like music by Beatles...by Paul I like songs like "Sing the Changes" or "Here Today" because these songs makes me﻿ want to cry and so I fall in love with "new Paul"...and now i feel like "Heey girl..what the hell you like ???" because i don´t know what is true...

There must be someone out there who has interviewed both Paul,and Faul, I mean come on now! The difference in the two has to be obvious! I never met the man, but red flags popped up for me in 1968, when I noticed the voice, appearance,and style of music suddenly and drastically changed big time. I've been studying this since then, and there is absolutely no way that this man ( Faul ) is the same Paul we all loved back in 1964. This website has done it's homework , and I will continue to support them. Good job Tina!!!!!!!!!! Jackhammer9132 aka Frank

I met John and Faul before the media hit with the PID controversy, and I sensed then, in 1968 that there was something strange. His skin looked waxy, his shaping was angular, voice higher than normal.......and there was no connection between him and John. I grew up in the Beatle era and now 60. But trust me, the man posing as Paul all these years is someone else. I was two feet away from him for about 15 minutes....that was enough!

I wish i could get seriously involved in this PID campaign because I`m 100% sure that this is not the real Paul McCartney and I will tell you how I came to this conclusion:

first of all, I was never a Beatles fan (my shame) because I never bumped into them during my childhood. My parents lived during the comunist era and in our country there was not that much music to listen to those days and even if the listened to one or two Beatles songs, it never stuck to them so no one passed it on to mes.

The awkward thing is that some time ago I became curious about the Beatles because i knew a few songs and a few lyrics but i didn`t know how they even looked like.

to make a long story short and i am giving you my oath that i am not telling lies, when seeing a photo of Paul nowdays my first reaction was " My God, this guy had a lot of plastic surgeries when he was young...he looks disfigured"

I repeat, I had no idea the PID theory even existed.

After a while I started noticing the big diferences between the two "Pauls" and realised that even if time has aged them, all of the Beatles had the same artistic gaze...except Paul. I asked my mother if over the years Paul became more cocky then the other group members, but, as i previously stated, she had no idea beceause she never payed much atention to them as a teenager.

A bit later i noticed that his body language had slightly changed. If you look closely you will see that it just resembles the real Paul`s body language...like it was copied!

After a short while a came across the PID theory and it seemed farfetched but i started to research it and the evidence is astounding.I couldn`t believe it when i found out about the plastic surgery. Suddenly the image became clear.

All the proof I needed I got from George Harrison`s various interviews in wich there is a very big difference when he speaks about his former school mate, the Paul that convinced John Lennon to let him into the band and the Paul that came later. Also he states in an interview that Paul was lefthanded, then lets us understand that Paul started to play with his wright hand and finnaly states "I`m still right handed, unlike others.."Also, George calles him "Faul" a number of times in interviews...

This is the documentary when George says this so you can see by yourselfes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_wiKO2QaO8

Ringo gave me a clue before i became aware of PID too. I read they where both attending some kind of official meeting and at the end of it there was an invitation for one of the beatles to go somwhere (i`m sorry i forgot where i read it but i will look it up) and Paul said "I will goo because I am the last remaining beatle".Ringo was there too and calmly said "Actually, I am the last remaining beatle".

The PID theory, if proven right, it would explain everything: John divorcing and fleeing England not like a jerl but in order to protect his family....his relation with May Pang...his return to Yoko... George`s attack....John`s murder. The band breaking up when they could have lasted as long as the Rolling Stones.Their three year public dissapearance.....

I didn`t mention the Beatles` hidden messages because I know they sustain themselves upon hearing. It is all more than clear.

And I understand why this theory hasn`t created the same h

This is just brief and frantically written material but I am sure that i can help a lot more in this situation

"I couldn`t believe it when i found out about the plastic surgery. Suddenly the image became clear."

Sandra, I also thought this. Given that the two remaining Beatles (Ringo & Faul/Paul) are rich men and can afford the best of health care, lifestyle & food etc, Faul has aged very badly. I even noticed this before I heard about the PID theory. He has always reminded me of those people who over-indulges in plastic surgery. There was always something fake about his appearance when older. Also I would not be surprised to find that Faul was older than the real Paul.

I was just about to mention the "last will of george harrison" Although it does seem like complete rubbish, it does show a few interviews with george calling him "Faul". I can remember seeing an interview in history class of George Harrison that my teacher showed us, in it he kept saying "Faul" I asked my teacher about it, and he said, sort of half jokingly, "Because Paul is dead" at the time i thought it was a joke, but he's a smart man, and a huge beatles fan, now i'm not so sure.

btw: Here is a link to a take to 'Here, There and Everywhere' with just the basic elements, and to which the vocals can be discerned very clearly:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iELGhAGwBdc&feature=related

I was a huge Beatle fan and loved Paul. I had heard a little about the PID conspiracy when Sargent Pepper came out and l liked the album However, I fell out of love with Paul because he was no longer cute. He just looked different to me and I didn't know why. Also, I thought, post Beatles, his music sucked. It was just awful. Something was just "off" about him.

Just for the curiousity of those interested: there's a movie that came out in 1966 called 'Seconds' (John Frankenheimer) in which a person is completely made-over into a new identity. For the technology of the 60's it was fairly possible without too many scars. Today, it's a whole new ball game.

Perhaps there was plastic surgery. But then let's think about the experiments being done by Germany during WWII on the topic of twins and the early efforts for human genetic engineering. Just a thought.

i just dont understand how the beatles would benefit from a conspiracy like this if bands like the who and the rolling stones were equally as succesful after the death of one of their bandmates, i mean they could've pushed their reform agenda further with or without paul

I still have not learned how Paul died. I read here that it was not a car accident that caused this whole mess. What killed our beloved Paul? And where is he buried? It must be eating away at poor Ringo, the last remaining Beatle, that he is the only one left that knows the truth. I hope he tells it before he leaves this world and sticks it to Faul.

The official story is that he died in a car accident. This is possible as he had not a few traffic incidents that may or may not have been accidental. However, if there was intent to get rid of him, they could easily have taken him to the back of a plane in mid-flight during one of their tours, and dealt with then disposed of via the baggage door. Back then, security wasn't so tight and aircraft were even less so, and it would have taken less time as planes were a lot smaller back the. This would explain why there has never been a body to perform forensics on. This would be the perfect crime.

So there is a biological daughter of Paul McCartney? If so she is the heir to Paul's royalties, and it would be wonderful to have Paul,s blood kin here. I would love stella McCartney kicked out on the street

There are more clues... I have one which can be proven, though you can call it anecdotical evidence only, at best. I was in Mexico City when Ringo Starr visited for a party at the local Capitol Records (now defunct, at least there), as he was promoting a new album where he sang a mariachi song (Mexican folk music), which was of course recorded with Mexican musicians, though I think it was recorded in the USA (Las Brisas is the name of the song) ~ A local journalist asked him if the four Beatles would ever play live again (as it was known that there had been several Beatle contributions in many of Ringo's solo albums). Ringo had been in a good mood, joking around and smiling; he was more than a bit drunk on tequila by then, and suddenly his mood changed, his smile vanished, and he said, "If it was (sic) possible, maybe... but it will never happen!"- He was asked why. Next moment, blank stare, and then there were tears in his eyes, and a look of deep anguish in his face. My companion said, oh poor Ringo! He is the soft one, so it hurts him very much, all the rancours between them. Now I think it was much more than that, but at the time I had no clue, so I agreed with her. Then, someone said, "no more questions!", and Ringo was whisked away... while he was crying out loud like a baby! Journalists were ordered to not take pictures, threatened with being sued later if they did dare. I think what triggered his reaction was the Mexican journalist specifying a reunion of the "four" Beatles, in his question. A recant of this brief exchange actually appeared in local newspaper El Universal, and a few others, where the journalists complained that neither the rock star nor the record executives were very cooperative with the press. But the journalists all said that Ringo was just drunk and sentimental about his bandmates.

I'm very interested in this whole 'Paul Is Dead' issue although I have never been a huge Beatles fan up until now. Anyways I'm only half convinced. I need to research this more before I'm on board. But what truly drew me in was the face.I never bothered to actually see the real Paul's photos before, i.e. from the early 60s. I only watched some of Faul's current appearances on TV (the Insider, ET and whatnot) and some of his photos from the 70s. I frankly found him to be quite ugly and I didn't understand what the hoopla was about. People used to say that he was the cutest and hottest 'Beatle' but I didn't buy it. Not until now anyway.

So after finding about this PID theory I googled Paul's photos up to 1966 and whaydya know the man was simply beautiful. His full lips,puppy eyes, hair, nose and chin were gorgeous. I thought, hey wait a minute, this is a different man. Note that I haven't been trained to see Faul as Paul mainly due to a lack of interest from my part. Therefore it was very easy for me to spot the difference. The pre- Sgt Pepper's Paul had a kind of innocence to him which was now lost. It could be due to a combination of drugs, age, stress or unhappiness. But the question is: Could all these factors cause a drastic change in just one year?

By the way I showed my mom several photos of Paul and Faul (she isn't a fan and couldn't care any less). She said that they were different people. And she could easily distinguish between them 100% of the time. So this 'PID' theory could be something after-all. But I still have my doubts.

My own experience was quite the opposite, as an early Beatlemaniac, I was amazed to see the replacement occured without the fans taking notice. As an artist and musician, it was plain to see that many photos were of some kind of double, and there were at least 2 new voices. The real Paul was absolutely diplomatically thoughtful with the intellectual Grace of a cat, always landing on his feet. Now the first time I witnessed these changes was in the october of 1966 at this time a rumor occured about Paul being killed. However in 1965 the fake pictures were already common in teen magazines.There were storys of the real Paul having digestive problems described as stage fright related, vomiting Etc.. I believe Faul was brought in originally as a double as early as spring 1965, to cover for the ailing Paul.

I don't think there was any "accident." I think Paul was assassinated and impostor-replaced with a double who had been trained & was at the ready. This happened sometime after the Seattle show on Aug. 25, 1966. Faul's debut was the Aug. 28, 1966 LA press conference. I think the accident story is just disinformation to throw people off the trail of something most sinister.

You could do some more research on the original Aston MARTIN that was owned by old Paul.What about the Aston martin that was sold to an overseas buyer. what is the plate number on this car? is it the same as the original aston martin that old Paul had? If the aston martin was severley damaged in a car crash--how could that fit the story about old Paul being burnt in a car crash? this could then make the death in a car crash suspect & give more credence to your theory that old Paul very tragically died under more sinister circumstances than the circumstances that have been put up by the remaining beatles. Full disclosure by the remaining beatles would be a bridge too far for them to make as they may not fully know what happened to old Paul.(they themselves do not have all the answers to the puzzle).Check out the factory plate numbers on the aston martins (now that will not be easy to do but would definitley shed some light on the matter)

Plastic Macca Thanks. This is all very complicated with many layers. Where there's smoke there is fire, right?

Anyway what I meant is , when was this disinformation spread and by whom? Was the alleged accident reported in a newspaper ? Or people just inferred that he was dead from the clues.

One more thing. I noticed that nobody has discussed the issue of Faul taking off his sandals for the Abbey Road cover. He claimed that it was a hot day, so why on earth would he walk barefoot on hot and burning concrete. Just a thought...but I might be mistaken because I am no physicist.

Back in 1967, people were already whispering that Paul had died. It was a pretty widespread "rumor" in London. I guess they assumed it was an accident, but I'm not sure why they thought that. In Oct. 1969, it was reported in some college papers USA that Paul had died in an accident. It became international news - everyone was wondering what was going on w/ Paul. When LIFE did its article, "Paul is Still With Us," people relaxed b/c the mainstream media assured them Paul was still alive. Ha! I wonder if people would be so gullible today?

I called out Faul on his different versions of the Abbey Road sandal story in "Funny Faul Flubs," which I think was in Jan. 2010. He said it was hot, so he took them off, he said they were uncomfortable, so he took them off, & there was another BS reason, but I forget now. The story is constantly changing. Obviously, it was a clue, but they don't want to admit it. But you're right, Why would anyone walk across a street barefoot when it's hot & there could be broken glass, cigarette butts, dog poo, & who knows what else? Stupid. lol

I'am thirty three years young. I've been listening to the Beatles most of my life. To read that the real Paul died forty plus years ago. It Breaks my heart. breaks my heart to know that I've been listening to a second rate Paul mccartney my whole life.

well I was just a kid at the time and remember seeing the beatles on tv and saying where is Paul? and everyone said to me - there he is...I said where? I never knew about these things as a child. On the naivety of a child I have to say sadly with this information - that he was replaced.

I'm 22 years old and always been The Beatles fan. But all I remember is I used to say to my mom that Paul McCartney was suppose to be the cutest one. I remembered him from black-white photos. Pictures from 70's and later are showing not really handsome guy. I was like "hmm maybe because of black-white effect he looked cute, short hair and puppy eyes makin him very adorable" Thought his new style PLUS drugs/alcohol was making him look just not atractive. Also why The beatles broke up? Why never back on the stage together. And why the heck rich guy like Paul looks so fake being 71 years old of course he will never look like young 20 year old boy but still... Ringo Starr always looked same lol well maybe bad gens, maybe other reason but what about his green eyes? It's so confusing, also shape of his nose it's different. I'm not sure if he is dead or he just using his double(s) but some picture of him are just fake! Sometimes we see Faul, sometimes Paul's and Faul's features are mixed. His voice also sucks (to be honest) I've noticed you mentioned "How do you sleep? song, the line "the only thing you've done was yesterday" means that Faul made that song lol which is not true because we remember his live show singing Yesterday (Ed Sullivan show 1964). Also cluse in songs and covers (some of them appeared before 1966) so they knew he will be dead? LOL I'm really torn about this theory. I'm not saying it's not possible, but some clues are just bollocks. But still I tend it's something fishy. Photos are the most truly proofs for me. Anyway I saw Paul's father picture when he was old, and he looked very like Paul (except he was almost bold), so maybe Paul's got just bad gens, or drugs influenced. What about Heather Mills? She probably knows something important, but we can't be sure If she means the Faul story, or something different. All I know that Paul's apperance after 1966 is different, it's not the same cute and a lil bit shy guy. BJ

Thank you for your beautifully researched pages. I am very interested in this whole issue of Paul McCartneys ID, and am almost completely convinced that this man is an imposter. I will be carrying out my own research on this, but I am finding your blogspot most helpful and will be coming back to you quite often. Once again. Thank you. D F Morgan-Smith

Photographic images are clearly admissible forensic evidence. I am not a scientist, but a lawyer. Essentially the way the judicial system works is as follows: The only main form of evidence which is inadmissible is "hearsay" evidence, that is, one witness states what he heard another person allege. However even this can be admissible if eg a person states under oath that he heard a person confess to an act. But one witness on his own would not be enough here.Forensic evidence sits at the top of the pyramid of evidence, above documentary evidence and above eye witnesses. Why? because it is based upon scientific analysis, which reduces the window of reasonable doubt. Witnesses can lie, or forget, or genuinely be mistaken about something they thought they saw, or recognised, or they may be intimidated or bribed or blackmailed. Documents can be forged, signatures can be forged. Photos can be forged (manipulated). But it is the duty of forensic science to verify signatures, or handwriting, or photos, or documents, or honesty through lie detector tests, etc etc. Forensic evidence is not fool proof, but it is the best we have, and it keeps getting better. So yes, the forensic evidence carried out by the Italian team is thus far the weightiest evidence that the post 66 Paul is not the same man. On the basis of that evidence, a court of law would, in my opinion, decide beyond a reasonable doubt that the pre and post '66 persons are not the same, unless and until defendant counters such evidence through other forensic tests, such as DNA, which of course would allow Faul to close the case, or through similar forensic photo analysis that results in conclusions different from the Italian forensic analysis. Of course neither have been furnished by the existing Paul. There are 2 levels of evidence required at Law. One is called proving your case on "the balance of probabilities" and the other is proving "beyond a reasonable doubt". The former is used in civil cases. It is like checking whether you pass a test by getting over 50%. If you do, you have passed the proof test and win the civil case. However in criminal law, where a person stands to go to prison, this level of proof is insufficient, and you need to prove his guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" to convict him. This is like having to get an "A" to qualify to go to University. The level of proof needs to be higher. In the Paul case, my legal opinion is that the forensic analysis carried out by the Italian team proves not just on a balance of probabilities, but even beyond a reasonable doubt, that we are looking at 2 different persons. Furthermore such forensic analysis is supported by corroborating evidence. Corroborating evidence alone would be insufficient in a court of law, but has great validity to further substantiate the higher level of evidence. Such corroborating evidence includes many, many things, like the difference in the voice, which seems clear to the naked ear, in the absence, unfortunately of forensic voice analysis, the colour of the eyes, the difference in style when speaking, and the highly suspicious circumstances of the band suddenly disappearing from tour for the rest of their career together, as well as from media interviews for over 2 years. Lastly there is the absence of Paul's unique music style, which would have seeped through, even with a total rehashing of the Beatles' style. This is conspicuously absent. As I said, these bits alone would be insufficient to prove a case, but following the Italian forensic analysis they become highly interesting pieces of corroborating circumstantial evidence.

Excellent commentary. Just a bit of thought, adding a few ideas to the Forensic side of the analysis. 1) what about researching whether there was finger, hand or foot prints at Paul's birth? 2) the possibility of childhood or other dental records prior to Paul's disappearance? 3) obtaining DNA from his brother and son & from Faul and or the results of the German DNA if still available to see if there is a match? Has Jane Asher or John's 1st wife, Cynthia ever been interviewed? It seems that the Y-DNA from the brother & son would be enough, case closed.

Are you a business man or woman, are you a musician or an artist, politicials do you want to be famous, fame or you want to become rich, powerful, be a member of the Illuminati and make your dream come through, this is the chance for you now to become a member of the brotherhood and be known worldwide, if you are ready to become a member and realize your dream then contact us now @ secure.illuminati000@gmail.com or visit us on our Facebook page at ILLUMINATI REIGNS. WE REIGN FOREVER

I'm sorry you've been misinformed. Your reign ends when Jesus Christ returns. It won't be long now... All things done in secret, for evil purposes will be exposed and brought into the light... Illuminated if you will. Pun intended.

Are you a business man or an artist,Politicians and you want to become big, Powerful and famous in the world, join us to become one of our official member today.you shall be given an ideal chance to visit the illuminati and his representative after registrations is completed by you, no sacrifice or human life needed, Illuminati brotherhood brings along wealth and famous in life, you have a full access to eradicate poverty away from your life now. it only a member who is been initiated into the church of illuminati have the authority to bring any member to the church, so before you contact any body you must be link by who is already a member, Join us today and realize your dreams. we also help out our member in protection of drugs pushing email: churchofdevililluminati@gmail.com or you contact our phone number +2347056024545

Once you become a member you will be rich and famous for the rest of your life, illuminati make there member happy so i will want you all to also be a member of the illuminati if you are interested contact email on churchofdevililluminati@gmail.com or you contact our phone number +2347056024545

Probably Faul is just a body double for the real Paul. Paul is not dead, only he sometimes busy or lazy to do something then he just send the body double. Like in the movie The Devil's Double (2011). Watch the movie and you will understand that body double is not impossible for famous people. that's my opinion. sometimes you see Paul, sometimes is Faul depend on the ocassion

Okay, big Beatles fan, ex-police officer, 60 years old. Recognizing faces, even out of context, has been part of my stock-in-trade. It's been obvious to me since about '72 that McCartney didn't look like McCartney anymore, but at the time I didn't give it much thought. Same thing had happened with Ann Margret when she was rebuilt after an accident. Mark Hamill changed drastically between Star Wars movies for the same reason. If it was still actually Hamill. However, the appearance Paul/Faul has changed back and forth from obviously not Paul to conceivably could be Paul. If Paul wasn't dead, he was at least getting doubled on occasion for whatever reason. If he was dead, then there has been more than one Faul.One thing I've never seen mentioned, though, is whether anyone has done a voice map on Paul versus Faul. That would trump every other type of evidence. Has no one ever put an oscilloscope on their respective voice tracks to compare? That's hard to believe.

Thank you for your comment. Dr. Henry Truby did voice prints & found there were 3 different voices for Yesterday, Penny Lane, & Hey Jude. Other people have also done there own voice prints on Paul/Faul, but not as official as Dr. Truby... at least, not that I know of.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is that if you look at the second Paul McCartney's four blood related children today (Mary, Stella, James and Beatrice) you can get a better idea of what he looked like before his surgeries.

Upon doing more research on this article some are saying it is Fake. :(The reporter was a former porn star and not trying to make a name for herself as a reporter. I'm not sure if this article is the real deal so let's keep searching. Thanks,

can anyone post the original audio or podcast of George Harrisons Last Testament? I have been looking for it everywhere. I heard it years ago, before they ever turned in into a movie and I suspect that the two may not be the same. Why would something like this be so thoroughly white washed from the internet, if they were not afraid of it. All one can find now are comments on what an obvious fake it is, and that it was inconclusive if Georges voice was the real deal or not, in voice testing. It would be conclusive, with todays technology, one way or another. If you have a link to it, post it please! And keep posting it...it could help flush out the truth.

I don't think he's dead, I think he's alive and well. I do think there is a lot of information that could suggests he could have been replaced. Does it really matter? What ever happen influenced the music that came from then after.

I've only seem information that could surgest he may have been replaced. Why do people think he died? He could have just had enough and left the band of his own free will and changed his identity and become someone else. If people think he did die then what are the surgestions to where the body was buried. If you listern to yesterday and replace the word she with he it could be about a band member leaving.

Paul's Disappearance... Unless Paul was actually killed in a car crash another possibility is that he was kidnapped. Clearly he and Paul had way too much power and threatened the agenda of the Jesuits. Sadly, Paul was probably kidnapped and possibly sacrificed. We don't have any real evidence that he was killed though. But certainly the replica, Faul has done a fine job and fooled many. Since the ruling class, power elite was threatened by the power of the Beatles. they had to do something. And remember, this is just business for these power frenzied people. They have one agenda, world domination, a new world order. They cant have us Sheople honestly believing in peace and love! Just look at what they did to Jesus and now hide behind his name as faceless puppeteers. We all know Ringo wants to shout it out to relieve his guilt for his part of the deception. But we know he cannot. It is possible John and George wanted to tell the truth also and it could have contributed to their demise. The ruling class cleverly hires disinfo writers to keep the truth hidden. If they let their guard down, the trail would lead back to them and they would never want to allow that. PR trained disinformation agents propaganda pros are paid pretty darn well from their work. But people on this forum are not the mindless sheeple they are trying to control. And even though I am only speculating here, I don't claim to know the dates of the kidnapping, although I have always had an intuition that Paul is not really Paul. And its not just that one could see that John had immensely more chemistry with Paul, it;s just something is not authentic wi/ Faul. I read where cloning technology existed at that time and all they would have had to do was take Paul's DNA for a replicant. But the thing with clones, is they have no soul. And the most amazing thing about the real Paul, is he had such a soaring sweet soul! I saw Faul perform live once, he is a good actor, a very, very good actor. But sorry Faul, you don't have Paul's heart and soul!

Look closely at the pictures from the Abbey Road photo shoot. The picture where 'Paul' is sitting on the steps along with the others. The sun is bright and shows that the other 3 Beatles hair is dark brown. If you look very closely at 'Paul's ' hair, it has a strawberry tint. If I'm right, why would Paul dye his hair? It makes sense, however, that Faul would dye his hair if it wasn't the same color as Paul's hair was. Of course, Faul's hair couldn't match Paul's hair color exactly, so it's a given that Faul would have to dye his hair. Has anyone noticed this or does anyone agree after looking at the Abbey Road pictures?

To tell the truth I didn't notice the red tint on Paul's hair color until it was pointed out.But, I have the remastered Ed Sullivan Beatle shows & Paul looks & sounds like Paul should have. Circa 1964-1965. Later, they the beatles totally changed with a weird look, much longer hair,& strange sound. Almost like a new begining for a new band not the original Beatles with a phony Paul MCCartney playing bass as a double.

Do you agree that Faul's hair has a strawberry tint as seen in the Abbey Road picture where he and the others are sitting on the steps with bright sunshine highlighting their hair color? I think I see a strawberry tint and if so, that's strong evidence that the man sitting there isn't Paul. Paul obviously wouldn't have dyed his hair to create a strange, strawberry tint but faul would certainly have to die his hair to try to match the color that Paul's hair was.................

Hello my name is Tatiana, I am doing a project about Faul McCartney at school and I need to interview 2 people via email. I will be sure to put you as a reference. Email me @ tmcfarland@raseforkids.com for more information. Thank you :)

I'm British and have worked in theatre with lots of the Robbins (Paul McCartney's cousins) and couldn't imagine in a million years them going a long with this because they're straight talking northerners and very honest. I'm not saying it's not true, I used to believe in the moon landing and 9/11 being terrorists and then was proved wrong, so you never know. Interesting theory anyway.

I'm kind of a skeptic when it comes to Illuminati and clandestine manueverings of a small group of people. However, I know big corporations which are run by a small minority have a lot of control over public opinion and government policy. There is a person in the USA who is in the process of buying the presidency not only with his own money but a lot of corporate backing. By 1966 the Beatles were more than four young men who'd acquired a lot of money successfully through their songwriting and musical efforts. Beatlemania was a huge industry from record sales and memorabilia. I remember when Beatle cards were sold with a stick of gum the way baseball cards used to be. The Beatles were under contract to produce a number of records. News of Paul McCartney's demise would have effectively stalled the fulfillment of those contracts to say the least, and it would have been news all over the world, similar, I think, to the Kennedy assassination. "Follow the money" is often a good rule of thumb when it comes to world events and the selective processing of how those get reported or covered up. I don't know if mass production of Beatles products was as big a corporate interest as say, Packard or Wal-mart, but it was big. Everyone wanted their records including myself. The Beatles artistically were expanding with new sounds and themes for song lyrics by 1965 with albums like Rubber Soul and Revolver when Paul would have still been alive but something invariably changed with Sergeant Pepper and afterward that was hard to define. Sergeant Pepper was a great achievement like Magical Mystery and a lot of material in the White Album but I realize now, after the fact, so to speak, that something had been lost in the artistry that had been uniquely Paul McCartney. Like most everyone else I accepted on face value that the man calling himself McCartney was the same person who'd written the soulful melody to "Things We Said Today." But the "new" Paul just didn't hold my interest. "New" Paul wrote a lot of clever ditties to be sure, but he seemed to have gone too "commercial." Someday the truth will come out.

I was a huge Beatles fan, and saw them twice in the States. At their first concert in Washington, D.C. in 1964 and in Baltimore in 1965. I saw them on TV whenever they were on. I especially liked Paul, as I found him to be not only very cute and boyish but also very thoughtful, bright, and well spoken. When Sgt. Pepper came out, I hated the album, it was dark and very off the music the band had been producing for years. I have always thought it was hyped as the BEST EVER for a reason, but did not know until I stumbled on the PID information. Paul and Faul are not the same man. I feel it in my gut, and I am very good about noticing details of people and their voices. When "McCartney" came out after the Beatles broke up, I was put off and did not like it. It sounded like someone else. Thus I have never since been interested in seeing "Faul" in concert, nor in his records.I am a long time psychologist and I trust my gut, as well as the Italian researchers conclusions. I hope someday we will know what really happened to him. Such a tremendous loss for so many. I agree with the previous post that the changes were palpable and noticeable after 1966. Voice is different and obviously so. Over time, I know that voices change...but only a little as they are more practiced. A good comparison is listening to Justin Hayward of the Moody Blues early in his career, vs. late in his career (now solo). His voice has mellowed a bit but you know its him. I know Faul is NOT Paul, and frankly I don't think he is all that talented by comparison to the early Beatles. Such a shame.

Thank you to both Paul,s for the fantastic contribution they both made to the Beatles & contemporarey music. They were both great. Love TO play the Beatles music & get the memories of the care free happy times we enjoyed then .Thank you to all the Beatles members for the fantastic music they created.I was very saddened to learn of the original Pauls early death-- but we must now LET IT BE. It did happen & can now understand why they decided to keep it a secret.You can tell by the public interviews they gave after 1966 that three of the members were no longer happy go lucky & strangely sad. It is amazing that they held it together for three more years. Heres to the fantastic songs& music they gave us.LET IT BE

Thank you for the round table discussion on video. This was very informative & helpfull with discussion from people who love the Beatles music. How exactly Paul died is still very much up for discussion & more research.If only we could bring back Columbo to do his investigations it may bring some more information to the table. Sadly the original Paul died under terrible circumstances--perhaps the car crash is the most palatable option.Did old Paul really die in a car crash or are there more sinister things that went on behind the scenes besides just coming up with a replacement for the original Paul. The new Paul is a fantastic muscision & he has come up with some fantastic songs. (the sad part is that the original Paul was never given a public funeral & given the send off he deserved).All the Beatles were sworn to secrecy as per George Harrisons alleged tapes (very likely genuine) which indicate they were all under constant monitoring lest they make a public DISCLOSURE which would have resulted in them being dealt with very severley.It is going take a long time for the full story to come out. As JIM mentioned ---if this story is pushed out too much to the general public --it will lead to more questions--JFK .911. BIN LADEN--what really happened? LET IT BE

It is time to give credit where credit is due--Have you ever sung along with some of the songs like you own them? I used to do that.Two songs come to mind readily--EIGHT DAYS A WEEK & WE CAN WORK IT OUT. Both of these songs were written by the original Paul McCartney. If you try to sing these songs solo they do not resonate. It is the harmony of the chorus as sung by the beatles that make both of these songs very special & emotional.Love both of these songs a great deal.(by the way paul probably came wtote both of these songs seperatley but in the space of 24 hrs in a flsh of inspiration.What is signifigent are the words-- LIFE IS VERY SHORT & THERES NO TiiiiME FOR FUSSING & FIGHTING MY FRIEND. (Ihave on several occasions felt a bit tearfull with these words put together so beautifully.When you think of all the horrible things people do to one another because they wanting get what they want now whatever the cost may be to other people --this does strike chord.Then you get to the words--TRY TO SEE IT MY WAY--WE CAN WORK IT OUT & GET IT STRAIGHT OR SAY GOODNIGHT.This is a plea by the singer to come around to my way of thinking.Unfortunately in the complex world of human conflict-- there are always two sides to an argument. You are dealing with human emotions,pride,ego etc. Have you ever spat the dummy & walked out on an argument?one good way is to call time out & reconsider your position & then start thinking about what the other persons point of view is.If you win the argument it may come at a very high price if you have not considered or negotiated some reasonable copromise with the person you have the disagreement with.In short we need to respect the feelings of the other person if we are ever going to settle the argument harmoniously.I still love the song ,but it raises an issue which is not addressed in the song. still a fantastic song

FOLLOWING ON from there--I love the story told by SIR GEORGE MARTIN when they were recording the song STRAWBERRY FIELDS.He asked JOHN which version of the recording he preferred. JOHN said he liked both arrangements of the song very much & could not decide on which one was best & suggested that George Martin put both versions on the album. SO guess what ---that is exactly what they did despite the fact that one version was one semi tone higher than the other-- no problem they just ran the two versions back to back with the same song repeated. (how is that for a compromise--run with both versions)All of the Beatles were a great team including George Martin

Paul's replacement's confession can be read in E UHarriet's wonderful 'novel', 'The Memoirs of Billy Shears'. It's pricey, but I think the knowledge gained is worth it. It agrees with the evidence presented here.

Good night sleep tight, and fool on the hill songs by the Beatles seems to talk about a dead person. Listen to them. Ringo Star sings good night sleep tight now the sun has turned off his light? Very sad song. And the song day after day alone on a hill the man with the foolish grin is is sitting perfectly still! doesnt move doesnt answer but watches the world go round and round. But nobody wants here him! Interesting songs. Sorry i think the words might not be in the correct order. What do u think about these two songs? Who were they written to do you think?

Face it...the truth is that the real Paul died in a car accident. AT the time the Beatles were now a corporation and were generating a lot of income to the English economy. If the truth was told back then, it would have meant total devastation economically. It was also of great concern to the government that the suicide rate of young girls between the ages of 12-16 would have gone thru the roof. You can not dispute the scientific facts nor can you dispute the fact that who we have been accepting as Paul McCartney has continually refused to take a DNA test to this day. Why not clear it up and stop the rumors if you have nothing to hide. Heather Mills, Jane Asher have been paid off to keep the secret and probably their lives. Ringo is the one true remaining Beatle that knows the truth and rumor has it that when he passes away there will be evidence from Ringo that will put an end to all of this. Just like the tapes by George Harrison that many have heard claiming the truth in fact Paul did dye, not wanting to leave this earth without a clear conscious. For those who do not believe Paul died are those who obviously have lived their lives in total denile in everything they have ever done.